Citation Nr: 9921616
Decision Date: 07/30/99 Archive Date: 08/03/99
DOCKET NO. 97-35 069 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Lincoln,
Nebraska
THE ISSUES
1. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee
disability.
2. Entitlement to service connection for a left ankle
disability.
3. Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hip
disability.
4. Entitlement to service connection for arthritis.
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
R. M. Panarella, Associate Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran served on active duty from January 1975 to July 1994.
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board)
on appeal from the September 1994 rating decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office in Lincoln,
Nebraska (RO). The Board notes that the RO granted service
connection for a low back disability, skin disease, and a lung
disability in May 1998. Accordingly, those issues are not
presently before the Board.
In his October 1997 VA Form 9, the veteran requested a personal
hearing before the Board. A hearing notification letter dated
April 1999 set the hearing for June 11, 1999. A notation in the
claims file indicates that the veteran did not appear for this
hearing. Given that no request for a postponement, showing of
good cause for failure to appear, or proper request for a new
hearing is of record, appellate review of the case may now
proceed as though the request for a hearing is withdrawn.
38 C.F.R. § 20.702(d) (1998).
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. There is no competent medical evidence that relates any
current right knee disability with the veteran's period of active
service.
2. There is no competent medical evidence that relates any
current left ankle disability with the veteran's period of active
service.
3. There is no competent medical evidence that the veteran
currently has a bilateral hip disability.
4. There is no competent medical evidence that the veteran
currently has arthritis of any extremity.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The claim of entitlement to service connection for a right
knee disability is not well grounded. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a)
(West 1991).
2. The claim of entitlement to service connection for a left
ankle disability is not well grounded. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a)
(West 1991).
3. The claim of entitlement to service connection for a
bilateral hip disability is not well grounded. 38 U.S.C.A.
§ 5107(a) (West 1991).
4. The claim of entitlement to service connection for arthritis
is not well grounded. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991).
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
A veteran may be granted service connection for injury or disease
contracted in the line of duty or for aggravation of a
preexisting injury or condition. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1110, 1131 (West
1991). To establish service connection, the veteran carries the
burden of "submitting evidence sufficient to justify a belief by
a fair and impartial individual that the claim is well-
grounded." 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991). A well-grounded
claim is one that is "a plausible claim, one which is
meritorious on its own or capable of substantiation." Murphy v.
Derwinski 1 Vet App. 78, 81 (1990). For a claim to be well-
grounded, there must be (1) competent medical evidence of a
current disability; (2) lay or medical evidence, as appropriate,
of incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury in service;
and (3) competent medical evidence of a nexus between the in-
service disease or injury and the current disability. Epps v.
Gober, 126 F.3d 1464, 1467-1468 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
The veteran's service medical records include a June 1974 ROTC
examination which showed no defects or abnormalities. However,
the veteran did report that he had a history of his right knee
dislocating approximately once every two to three months since
1970. In June 1974, the veteran had an orthopedic consultation
performed due to the history of repeated dislocation of the right
patella. The veteran stated that the patella dislocated when he
was walking, but that he had no pain, swelling, or locking of the
knee. Examination showed full range of motion, no patellar
laxity, and normal ligaments.
In October 1975, the veteran complained of pulling a tendon of
the left ankle. He was assessed with questionable tendonitis of
the left Achilles. In September 1978, the veteran presented with
a left inversion type ankle sprain. No fracture was noted. The
veteran returned a few days later and examination showed moderate
swelling, tenderness, and mild instability. The following month,
the veteran was seen for a follow-up of the ligament sprain.
Objectively, the ankle was nontender, without swelling, with a
full range of motion, and a negative anterior drawer. The
veteran was assessed as doing well.
In November 1991, the veteran complained of pain in the left hip
after jumping and running. Objective findings included good gait
and range of motion, no swelling, no bony abnormality or spasm,
and soreness of the gluteal area. He was assessed with a muscle
strain. At his retirement examination in April 1994, the veteran
reported a history of a broken ankle in 1979, arthritis of both
hands, and a right knee which popped out. However, the
examination found no abnormalities or defects.
The veteran was afforded a VA examination in March 1998. The
veteran reported that he had fractured his left ankle in the late
1970's and that his leg had been casted. At the present time, he
said that the left ankle grinds and made a clicking noise,
particularly with activity, but did not swell. He believed that
his left leg was longer than the right. The veteran also
reported that he had injured his right knee in 1975. He now
occasionally had swelling, pain, and a clicking or popping
sensation in the knee. However, he ran several times a week,
with distances of 4 to 5 miles each time, and he had also run
many marathons. He said that he favored the left ankle and that
this contributed to his right knee pain.
Upon examination, no leg length difference was measured.
Objective findings pertaining to the knees were no edema, a
negative anterior/posterior drawer and a negative McMurray's
bilaterally. Extension was measured to 0 degrees and flexion was
to 140 degrees. Likewise, the veteran's ankles showed no obvious
deformity and no edema. Plantar flexion was measured to 40
degrees bilaterally and dorsiflexion was to 10 degrees on the
left and to 15 degrees on the right. Bilateral inversion and
eversion and peripheral pulses were intact. The radiological
reports of the veteran's ankles, knees, and hips were all
negative for any abnormality. The veteran was diagnosed with
multiple joint pain, without evidence of disease.
In summary, the Board finds that the record has failed to provide
any competent medical evidence of a nexus between any current
right knee or left ankle disability and the veteran's period of
active service. As to the right knee, the service medical
records show only that the veteran had complaints of a
dislocating patella which preexisted service. There is no
evidence of record which establishes that the veteran has ever
received treatment for a right knee disability. During the
recent VA examination, the examiner could discern no objective
disease or injury of the knee. Furthermore, there is no medical
evidence which relates the veteran's current complaints of knee
pain to his period of active service.
As to the left ankle, the service medical records disclose that
the veteran sustained an ankle sprain approximately 20 years ago.
The records suggest that the veteran quickly recovered and that
the ankle sprain was an acute condition which fully resolved
without residual. There is no evidence that the veteran received
any further treatment of the left ankle. The VA examiner could
identify no present disability of the ankle and no medical
professional has related the veteran's current complaints to his
period of active service.
The Board further finds that the veteran has presented no current
evidence of a hip disability. Service medical records show that
the veteran was assessed with a muscle strain after complaints of
left hip pain. However, there were no objective findings of
abnormality of the hip. At the VA examination, the veteran did
not make any complaints regarding his hips and the x-ray report
was negative for any defect. Likewise, there is no current
evidence of arthritis of any of the veteran's extremities and
there was no evidence of the presence of arthritis in service.
Recent x-ray reports do show some degenerative changes in the
veteran's back; however, the RO has separately evaluated the
veteran's low back disability. Therefore, as no competent
medical evidence of a nexus between the veteran's current
subjective complaints and his period of active service has been
submitted, the veteran's claims must be denied as not well
grounded.
Because the veteran has failed to meet his initial burden of
submitting evidence of well-grounded claims for service
connection, the VA is under no duty to assist him in developing
the facts pertinent to those claims. See Epps, 126 F.2d at 1468.
As the Board is not aware of the existence of additional evidence
that might well ground the veteran's claims, a duty to notify
does not arise pursuant to 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103(a) (West 1991).
See McKnight v. Gober, 131 F.3d 1483, 1484-85 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
That notwithstanding, the Board views this discussion as
sufficient to inform the veteran of the elements necessary to
well ground his claims, and as an explanation as to why his
current attempt fails.
ORDER
Evidence of a well-grounded claim not having been submitted,
service connection for a right knee disability is denied.
Evidence of a well-grounded claim not having been submitted,
service connection for a left ankle disability is denied.
Evidence of a well-grounded claim not having been submitted,
service connection for a bilateral hip disability is denied.
Evidence of a well-grounded claim not having been submitted,
service connection for arthritis is denied.
WARREN W. RICE, JR.
Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals